| The purpose of the dissertation is to explore alternative Marxist conceptions of class. This entails a confrontation between individualist and structuralist approaches to Marxist theory in general, and to class in particular. The central question concerns the relative advantages claimed by the defenders of methodological individualism over the structural (systematic dialectical) methodology employed by conventional Marxism. A major part of the investigation is an analysis of the so-called "analytical" Marxists, a group (including, among others, John Roemer and Jon Elster) who claim to be operating within the "Marxian tradition," but argue that Marxist methodology is in need of revision, utilizing the "advanced" methods now available to contemporary social scientists. As such, the Analytical Marxists' work represents an explicit attempt to apply the principles of methodological individualism and microfoundational analysis to many of the concerns addressed by Marxism (but ignored by the mainstream social sciences)---class formation, class-based exploitation, class consciousness, class struggle, etc. The central question, then, is whether individualist methodology is capable of explaining the same phenomenon as conventional Marxism: the division of society into classes. The claims for the superiority of methodological individualism are investigated in depth, through both an analysis of the theoretical arguments, and in the context of an actual case of active class struggle: the 1991--1998 conflict between the Caterpillar Tractor Company and its workers. The dissertation concludes that, in fact, individualist analysis is unsuited for Marxism. The conventional Marxist account, which (the dissertation argues) sees classes as an expression of the phenomenon of redundant causality in social systems, is superior because it takes account of the way in which individuals are related in a larger system. |
